In Case You're Wondering What Crazy Benghazi Lady Is On About...But Were Afraid To Ask

[Anonymous]

Crowley did pick up a paper when Obama said "get the transcript"

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Furthermore, look at Crowley's statement:

"He did call it an act of terror," Crowley said of the president's remarks, but then told Romney, "you are correct" that it took the White House two weeks to fully admit that the attack was the result of planned terrorist operation and not part of protest against an anti-Islam video.

So she's saying that Obama called it an act of terror in the Rose Garden and that he lied about it. Note the use of "fully admit"

This is exactly what I said in my previous post. Obama called it an "act of terror" but took two weeks to call it an "act of terrorism". If you think the difference of those two phrases is a "lie", you are pretty ridiculous.

To him, it seems distinctly different.

But, given that you are not him, you acknowledge that they are the same?

BTW, where is the evidence that Crowley had a transcript of the Rose Garden statement? Two different wingers were making that claim and no evidence has been presented.

AGAIN, this is what Obama said:

KROFT: “Mr. President, this morning you went out of your way to avoid the use of the word ‘terrorism’ in connection with the Libya attack.”

OBAMA: “Right.”


My opinion does not matter. Neither does yours. Obama says he avoided the use of the word terrorism in connection with the Libya attack on the 12th. Period. End of story.

[Anonymous]

My opinion does not matter. Neither does yours. Obama says he avoided the use of the word terrorism in connection with the Libya attack on the 12th. Period. End of story.

+1000

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Furthermore, look at Crowley's statement:

"He did call it an act of terror," Crowley said of the president's remarks, but then told Romney, "you are correct" that it took the White House two weeks to fully admit that the attack was the result of planned terrorist operation and not part of protest against an anti-Islam video.

So she's saying that Obama called it an act of terror in the Rose Garden and that he lied about it. Note the use of "fully admit"

This is exactly what I said in my previous post. Obama called it an "act of terror" but took two weeks to call it an "act of terrorism". If you think the difference of those two phrases is a "lie", you are pretty ridiculous.

To him, it seems distinctly different.

But, given that you are not him, you acknowledge that they are the same?

BTW, where is the evidence that Crowley had a transcript of the Rose Garden statement? Two different wingers were making that claim and no evidence has been presented.

AGAIN, this is what Obama said:

KROFT: “Mr. President, this morning you went out of your way to avoid the use of the word ‘terrorism’ in connection with the Libya attack.”

OBAMA: “Right.”


My opinion does not matter. Neither does yours. Obama says he avoided the use of the word terrorism in connection with the Libya attack on the 12th. Period. End of story.

Liar liar pants on fire. http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=50134495n&tag=mg;60minutes

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Furthermore, look at Crowley's statement:

"He did call it an act of terror," Crowley said of the president's remarks, but then told Romney, "you are correct" that it took the White House two weeks to fully admit that the attack was the result of planned terrorist operation and not part of protest against an anti-Islam video.

So she's saying that Obama called it an act of terror in the Rose Garden and that he lied about it. Note the use of "fully admit"

This is exactly what I said in my previous post. Obama called it an "act of terror" but took two weeks to call it an "act of terrorism". If you think the difference of those two phrases is a "lie", you are pretty ridiculous.

To him, it seems distinctly different.

But, given that you are not him, you acknowledge that they are the same?

BTW, where is the evidence that Crowley had a transcript of the Rose Garden statement? Two different wingers were making that claim and no evidence has been presented.

AGAIN, this is what Obama said:

KROFT: “Mr. President, this morning you went out of your way to avoid the use of the word ‘terrorism’ in connection with the Libya attack.”

OBAMA: “Right.”


My opinion does not matter. Neither does yours. Obama says he avoided the use of the word terrorism in connection with the Libya attack on the 12th. Period. End of story.

Liar liar pants on fire. http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=50134495n&tag=mg;60minutes

How can a direct quote from Obama, an answer to a direct question to him, be a lie?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Furthermore, look at Crowley's statement:

"He did call it an act of terror," Crowley said of the president's remarks, but then told Romney, "you are correct" that it took the White House two weeks to fully admit that the attack was the result of planned terrorist operation and not part of protest against an anti-Islam video.

So she's saying that Obama called it an act of terror in the Rose Garden and that he lied about it. Note the use of "fully admit"

This is exactly what I said in my previous post. Obama called it an "act of terror" but took two weeks to call it an "act of terrorism". If you think the difference of those two phrases is a "lie", you are pretty ridiculous.

To him, it seems distinctly different.

But, given that you are not him, you acknowledge that they are the same?

BTW, where is the evidence that Crowley had a transcript of the Rose Garden statement? Two different wingers were making that claim and no evidence has been presented.

AGAIN, this is what Obama said:

KROFT: “Mr. President, this morning you went out of your way to avoid the use of the word ‘terrorism’ in connection with the Libya attack.”

OBAMA: “Right.”


My opinion does not matter. Neither does yours. Obama says he avoided the use of the word terrorism in connection with the Libya attack on the 12th. Period. End of story.

Please procede, Governor.

[takoma]

Somewhere in the middle of Kroft's question,Obama mumbled something like "right", meaning to me, "I get where you're going." Then he actually answered the question "Well it's too early to know exactly how this came about ..."

In other words, one of our resident ranters totally mis-characterized the exchange. But he or she got me to waste time responding (along with several other suckers), so chalk it up as the ranter's victory.

[Anonymous]

Any time a conservative posts a quote that cuts off suddenly, you can be sure that the truth is in the two minutes that follow it.

I wonder whether the poster did that deliberately or is being duped by their media.

[Anonymous]

President Sleazy Punk came by his name honestly, one of his very few honest endeavors..........

[Anonymous]

takoma wrote:Somewhere in the middle of Kroft's question,Obama mumbled something like "right", meaning to me, "I get where you're going." Then he actually answered the question "Well it's too early to know exactly how this came about ..."

In other words, one of our resident ranters totally mis-characterized the exchange. But he or she got me to waste time responding (along with several other suckers), so chalk it up as the ranter's victory.

But we also know now it was NOT too early to know exactly how this came about. He knew damn well it was a terrorist attack on 9/11. So what y'all are saying is yes, he knew that it was a terrorist attack, said it was a terrorist attack, then went on the talk show circuit along with Rice and told the American people that it was a spontaneous demonstration either gone bad or a spontaneous demonstration that attracted the wrong people and/or the video was involved or worse yet, as above, that we don't know when he DID know. Jeff's response to that is blame the CIA, which is saying that the most powerful man on earth had no idea what was going on. As a logical individual, does that seem right to you?

You should all be incredibly suspicious after Holder said that he had not heard from the President after 5:30 PM on that evening. What that means is either the President felt so uninvolved that he simply went to bed/retired for the evening or that he was awake and alert the whole time and wanted to be distanced from the situation when it went bad.

In addition, Panetta told Graham that no DoD asset - aircraft or individual soldier - was sent to Benghazi to help. Panetta stated the reason was because the attack had ended before such assets could be sent. Graham correctly asserted that we didn't know how long the attack would last.

Again, Obama was MIA after 5:30 PM. That's OK?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Any time a conservative posts a quote that cuts off suddenly, you can be sure that the truth is in the two minutes that follow it.

I wonder whether the poster did that deliberately or is being duped by their media.

The poster (me) is well aware that the President cannot call claim to have called this a terrorist attack in the Rose Garden on the 12th, then go a show a mere few hours later and claim he doesn't know. In fact, we now know that they knew that evening. Furthermore, the President went on more shows days later, claiming similar.

If you think the most powerful man in the world doesn't know the details, I want some of what y'all have. There's no way the President checked out at 5:30 PM during an event like this. If he indeed did, y'all should be questioning his leadership capabilities.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Any time a conservative posts a quote that cuts off suddenly, you can be sure that the truth is in the two minutes that follow it.

I wonder whether the poster did that deliberately or is being duped by their media.

The poster (me) is well aware that the President cannot call claim to have called this a terrorist attack in the Rose Garden on the 12th, then go a show a mere few hours later and claim he doesn't know. In fact, we now know that they knew that evening. Furthermore, the President went on more shows days later, claiming similar.

If you think the most powerful man in the world doesn't know the details, I want some of what y'all have. There's no way the President checked out at 5:30 PM during an event like this. If he indeed did, y'all should be questioning his leadership capabilities.

Again, you are just reaching desperately for something to hold onto here. Why would the president lay down all his cards a day or two after the attack, before a full investigation into what had happened was complete? What a waste of time to even respond to you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Any time a conservative posts a quote that cuts off suddenly, you can be sure that the truth is in the two minutes that follow it.

I wonder whether the poster did that deliberately or is being duped by their media.

The poster (me) is well aware that the President cannot call claim to have called this a terrorist attack in the Rose Garden on the 12th, then go a show a mere few hours later and claim he doesn't know. In fact, we now know that they knew that evening. Furthermore, the President went on more shows days later, claiming similar.

If you think the most powerful man in the world doesn't know the details, I want some of what y'all have. There's no way the President checked out at 5:30 PM during an event like this. If he indeed did, y'all should be questioning his leadership capabilities.

The most powerful man in the world didn't know that there were no WMD in Iraq. Despite a network of spies and satellites. He trusted the word of a few people who had an axe to grind with Saddam Hussein.

So yes, even The Most Powerful Man on Earth is subject to errors in information. Unless you want to admit that GWB lied to America. Your call, write back and tell us which it is.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Any time a conservative posts a quote that cuts off suddenly, you can be sure that the truth is in the two minutes that follow it.

I wonder whether the poster did that deliberately or is being duped by their media.

The poster (me) is well aware that the President cannot call claim to have called this a terrorist attack in the Rose Garden on the 12th, then go a show a mere few hours later and claim he doesn't know. In fact, we now know that they knew that evening. Furthermore, the President went on more shows days later, claiming similar.

If you think the most powerful man in the world doesn't know the details, I want some of what y'all have. There's no way the President checked out at 5:30 PM during an event like this. If he indeed did, y'all should be questioning his leadership capabilities.

The most powerful man in the world didn't know that there were no WMD in Iraq. Despite a network of spies and satellites. He trusted the word of a few people who had an axe to grind with Saddam Hussein.

So yes, even The Most Powerful Man on Earth is subject to errors in information. Unless you want to admit that GWB lied to America. Your call, write back and tell us which it is.

Actually, they are in Syria. Those satellites proved that, it's documented, but have at it.

BUT, let's say you are correct. How many times did we hear - and are still hearing - BUSH LIED BUSH LIED from liberals? And now we're hearing "Obama the great but he's fallible" LOL.

The difference here is that it was known in the first 24 hours what was going on and Obama chose to go on National TV and lie anyway. And Bush was not missing during the 9/11/2001 attacks, as Obama was during the 9/11/2012 attacks. Missing. Gone. After 5:30 PM. Where was he?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Any time a conservative posts a quote that cuts off suddenly, you can be sure that the truth is in the two minutes that follow it.

I wonder whether the poster did that deliberately or is being duped by their media.

The poster (me) is well aware that the President cannot call claim to have called this a terrorist attack in the Rose Garden on the 12th, then go a show a mere few hours later and claim he doesn't know. In fact, we now know that they knew that evening. Furthermore, the President went on more shows days later, claiming similar.

If you think the most powerful man in the world doesn't know the details, I want some of what y'all have. There's no way the President checked out at 5:30 PM during an event like this. If he indeed did, y'all should be questioning his leadership capabilities.

Again, you are just reaching desperately for something to hold onto here. Why would the president lay down all his cards a day or two after the attack, before a full investigation into what had happened was complete? What a waste of time to even respond to you.

Not laying down your cards is one thing. Lying outright is quite another.